That looks like a great price.
How much speed, effectively, does one lose by going USB 2.0 over Firewire?
Spike: Or maybe Captain Forehead was feeling a little less special. Didn't like me crashing his exclusive club, another vampire with a soul in the world. Angel: You're not in the world, Casper.
'Just Rewards (2)'
Buffistechnology 2: You Made Her So She Growls?
Got a question about technology? Ask it here. Discussion of hardware, software, TiVos, multi-region DVDs, Windows, Macs, LINUX, hand-helds, iPods, anything tech related. Better than any helpdesk!
§ ita § - Mar 20, 2006 10:53:49 am PST #7631 of 10003
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
tommyrot - Mar 20, 2006 10:53:54 am PST #7632 of 10003
Sir, it's not an offence to let your cat eat your bacon. Okay? And we don't arrest cats, I'm very sorry.
Wasn't someone looking for an external drive recently?
Wasn't it ita?
I want a one-terabyte drive. Just because I like the word "terabyte."
I think the first time I ever heard that word was on ST:TNG, in reference to Data's memory....
Gudanov - Mar 20, 2006 10:59:50 am PST #7633 of 10003
Coding and Sleeping
How much speed, effectively, does one lose by going USB 2.0 over Firewire?
Dunno, in theory you shouldn't lose any, in practice I'm pretty sure USB is slower but I don't know by how much. I have only internal drives so I have no practical experience.
Jessica - Mar 20, 2006 11:01:13 am PST #7634 of 10003
And then Ortus came and said "It's Ortin' time" and they all Orted off into the sunset
IME, the difference is only noticeable if you need realtime access to very very big files (like for video editing).
NoiseDesign - Mar 20, 2006 11:05:57 am PST #7635 of 10003
Our wings are not tired
With USB it really depends on the machine and on how much activity is going on. Firewire has a dedicated controller to deal with the overhead, USB uses computer resources to deal with the overhead. If you are on a heavily taxed machine then USB really takes a performance hit.
Gudanov - Mar 20, 2006 11:08:27 am PST #7636 of 10003
Coding and Sleeping
Firewire has a dedicated controller to deal with the overhead, USB uses computer resources to deal with the overhead.
That's good to know.
tommyrot - Mar 20, 2006 11:08:30 am PST #7637 of 10003
Sir, it's not an offence to let your cat eat your bacon. Okay? And we don't arrest cats, I'm very sorry.
So is Apple really abandoning Firewire?
§ ita § - Mar 20, 2006 11:11:26 am PST #7638 of 10003
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
So is Apple really abandoning Firewire?
The Intel Minis have Firewire ports, so they're not doing a big job of abandoment.
Thanks for the architecture advice, ND. I remembered readin on the side of a product box that they recommended Firewire for maxiumum performance, but they never said why.
Speaking of product boxes, the Microsoft iPod box video was created inside Microsoft.
Tom Scola - Mar 20, 2006 11:11:54 am PST #7639 of 10003
Remember that the frontier of the Rebellion is everywhere. And even the smallest act of insurrection pushes our lines forward.
So is Apple really abandoning Firewire?
If Apple were really abandoning Firewire, they wouldn't have put it in the new Intel boxes, let alone giving these new boxes the ability to boot from a Firewire drive (a feature that no other x86 box has).
tommyrot - Mar 20, 2006 11:13:15 am PST #7640 of 10003
Sir, it's not an offence to let your cat eat your bacon. Okay? And we don't arrest cats, I'm very sorry.
So either I was misinformed, or I misunderstood, and got that idea from iPods abandoning Firewire.